Rules of Causation Case. Jess throws paint in Sams eyes. Sam had to go to hospital to have paint removed from his eyes. On the way home, just before his sight was fully recovered, he tripped on the kerb and fractured his skull.

Jess throws paint in Sam's eyes. Sam had to go to hospital to have paint removed from his eyes. On the way home, just before his sight was fully recovered, he tripped on the kerb and fractured his skull. - Outline the rules of causation and briefly discuss whether Jess caused Sam's fractured skull (7 marks) Once it has been established that the defendant performed the act, the prosecution must prove that it was the defendant's conduct which caused those consequences to occur. The prosecution has to show that the defendant's conduct was the factual cause of that consequence, the defendant's conduct was in law the cause of that consequence and there was no intervening act which broke the chain of causation. There are two types of causation, factual causation, the defendant can only be guilty if the consequences would not have happened but for this act. An example of this is, R v Pagett, the defendant used his girlfriend as a human shield against police fire. He shot at the police, they fired back, killing his girlfriend. But for his actions she wouldn't have died. This relates to the scenario because but for Jess throwing paint in Sam's eyes, he would not have been partly sighted and tripped on the kerb resulting in a fractured skull. Causation in law, the defendant's actions must be the operating and substantial cause. An example of this is, R v Smith, two soldiers were

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 664
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Murder - Notes and Evaluation.

Murder Murder is a common law offence; it has been defined by the decisions of judges in cases and the accepted definition is based on one given by Lord Coke. This is that murder is 'the unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's peace with malice aforethought, express or implied'. In order for the actus reus to be fulfilled, the following principles must be satisfied : 1.) The defendant must do an act 2.) Which is unlawful 3.) which substantially causes the death of the victim 4.) who was a human being. There used to be a further requirement - that the victim had to die within a year and a day of his last injury by the defendant. This was abolished in 1996. .) The defendant must do an act To be guilty of murder the Defendant must have been proven to have done a voluntary act, although manslaughter can also consist of an omission. This can arise when the Defendant is under a legal duty to act but fails to do so, as in the following situations - Special legal relationship, e.g. Gibbons & Proctor (loco parentis), Statutory Duty, e.g. Road Traffic Act 1972, Voluntary undertaking, Employment duties and Accidental act which creates a dangerious situation. It is very unusual for a charge of murder to be based upon an ommission. 2.) Which is unlawful The act or omission that causes the victims death must be unlawful. It is not unlawful if what is done is in

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1392
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Critical evaluation of murder for A2 law unit 4

Murder answer plan At the beginning of its report on the Partial Defences to Murder (Law Com 290, 2004), the Law Commission says expressly that it "has long considered that the law of murder is in need of review". This shows that it has been brought to the attention of parliament by their advisors that the law on murder is in an great need of being changed, however as parliament doesn't have to follow all that the law commission suggests to them - all the law commission is designed to do is to suggest to parliament things they think need to be changed, not things parliament will in fact change. This shows that there are indeed some points of the law on murder which need to be addressed, but that parliament isnt responding to that need as they don't feel they have the time to carry out the drafting of a statue to change it. So it shows a lack of commitment to addressing the law on behalf of parliament, whose job it is really to make the country a safer place to live in for the citizens of the UK, but it is debatable as to how safe our country really is when parliament don't commit the time to changing important statutes on murder as murder is a serious issue as to the life and wellbeings of british citizens - many people want justice to be served by those who are a danger to society. The law on murder is considered to be quite old, as the definition used for it was by Lord

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 2528
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

How effective was the defence of intoxication?

How effective was the defence of intoxication? Intoxication is the excessive drinking and various forms of drug taking which can be voluntary or involuntary. Intoxication can be a defence depending on whether or not D has the required mens rea. If in an intoxicated state without the required mens rea D may not be guilty. This depends on whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary and whether the offence charged was one of specific or basic intent. The absence of mens rea is required otherwise intoxication cannot be a defence as shown in Kingston (1994) 'a drugged intent is still intent'. Even if D lacks the mens rea D can still be found liable which is an exception to the rule that both mens rea and actus reus are required. Voluntary intoxication can negate the mens rea for a specific intent offence. If D is so intoxicated he cannot form the mens rea, he may be able to put forward the defence, but normally he will not avoid liability completely, if it is possible to convict him a lesser basic intent offence. If D is so intoxicated that he has not formed the mens rea for the offence he is not guilty. This rule comes from the case DPP v Beard. D had been charge with murder and pleaded intoxication to deny malice aforethought. From this case it is now accepted that D need not be incapable of forming intent; it is sufficient if they do not in fact do so. However, D

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1624
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Discuss whether the rules governing insanity as a defence in criminal law are in a satisfactory state or are in need of reform.

Q3 Discuss whether the rules governing insanity as a defence in criminal law are in a satisfactory state or are in need of reform. [50] Insanity is a complete, general defence. A complete defence is where the mens rea is completely removed from the crime; mens rea is Latin for ‘guilty mind’ and refers to the definition of a crime that deals with what the defendants state of mind must have been to be guilty for example Murder, the mens rea of it is the intent to kill or do GBH.. The general part of insanity Is something which can be used for any crime. Insanity is also known as insane automatism and the Criminal Procedure Act 1991 gives the outlines for the defendant who is found not guilty by way of insanity. Insanity cannot count as a defence to strict liability crimes such as speeding and these are crimes which are less serious and don’t have a mens rea. At any time throughout the trial the defence for insanity can be called upon by any member of the defence or prosecution. If a claim for insanity is successful then the defendant will end up with a verdict of not guilty however they will have to go to a mental hospital to prevent further danger to themselves and other people. If there is an unsuccessful claim of insanity then the defendant may be found guilty and therefore go to prison etc, or he may be fully acquitted. Whether the defendant can be classed as

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1383
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

English law does not normally impose liability for an omission or failure to act despite the fact that there may be compelling moral justifications for doing so. For example, the courts have often explained that there is no legal duty upon a stranger to rescue a drowning child. Consider whether the current legal principles governing omissions are satisfactory (50 marks)

‘English law does not normally impose liability for an omission or failure to act despite the fact that there may be compelling moral justifications for doing so. For example, the courts have often explained that there is no legal duty upon a stranger to rescue a drowning child.’ Consider whether the current legal principles governing omissions are satisfactory (50 marks) The term Actus Reus is the Latin translation of ‘Guilty Act’. The Actus Reus of an offence concerns all those elements of the offence not relating to the defendants state of mind, the Mens Rea. For the Actus Reus the act or omission must be a positive voluntary act on the part of the defendant. If the defendant has no control over his actions then he has not committed the offence. The Actus Reus must also be Positive except in certain cases; this is the area of law that states for someone to commit an offence they must positively cause an act and not an omission to act, The law also states that there is no legal duty upon a stranger to rescue a drowning child. On the other hand, as there are several areas of law, 5 implemented by courts and 1 implemented through parliament, where a duty to act is existent there is often uncertainty on behalf of the defendant that they were under a duty to act in the first place. This could be solved by putting in a ‘good Samaritan’ law such as is in place in

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 2121
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

With close reference to the cases of Shaw v DPP and Knuller v DPP , Show how the law relates to morals and religion.

1/18/2012 With close reference to the cases of Shaw v DPP and Knuller v DPP , Show how the law relates to morals and religion. What is the relation of law to morality? Law’s relation to morality has been debated ever since jurisprudence itself came to be and it seems as though it is destined to remain as one of the great philosophical debates. They are mutually engaged along a course that winds through a political society’s life. Laws are generally based on the moral principles of society. Both regulate the conduct of the individual in society. They influence each other to a great extent. Laws, to be effective, must represent the moral ideas of the people. But good laws sometimes serve to rouse the moral conscience of the people and create and maintain such conditions as may encourage the growth of morality. However, it is said that not because something is immoral that makes it illegal, example: pre-marital sex, neglecting your family and adultery are just a few. Sometimes morality can influence the law in the sense that it can provide the reason for making whole groups of immoral actions illegal. With regards to this, in the case of Shaw v DPP (1962), Lord Diplock said “Shaw’s act of publishing advertisements for prostitutes soliciting fornication tended to corrupt public morals. Therefore Shaw’s agreement to do that act was a crime at common law”. The

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 975
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Law should encourage citizens in their civic duty to do 'the right thing' in a moral sense and not to turn a blind eye or to fail to act to help someone who is in need. Consider to what extent the criminal law relating to omissions (failures to act)

"Law should encourage citizens in their civic duty to do 'the right thing' in a moral sense and not to turn a blind eye or to fail to act to help someone who is in need." Consider to what extent the criminal law relating to omissions (failures to act) reflects this view. An omission is when a person voluntarily fails to act. The general rule is that an omission cannot make a person guilty of an offence. This was explained by Stephen J in which he stated; "A sees B drowning and is able to save B by holding out his hand. A abstains in doing so in order that B drowns. A has committed no offence." However, there are exceptions where the failure to act is the actus reus of a crime; an Act of Parliament can create liability for an omission because the defendant has a statutory duty. An example of this would be if a parent had neglected their child of food and clothing then they would be in breach of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. Therefore the defendant could be prosecuted for not carrying out the duty made by this act. Another exception to the rule of omissions is if the person has a contractual duty, and fails to carry out their responsibilities in their contract. This happened in the case of R V Pittwood 1902 where the defendant was a railway-crossing keeper who failed to shut the gates when a train was approaching which resulted in the death of someone who was

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1078
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Is the current law on the non-fatal offences against the person satisfactory?

Reform of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person It has been recommended by many leading academic lawyers, including Professor Spencer, that the current legislation on non-fatal offences against the person be reformed to modernise and clarify the law. The Offences Against the Person Act 1861, under which the more serious offences of ABH, GBH and GBH with intent are charged, is one of the "workhorses" of the criminal law, and is responsible for approximately 80,000 cases a year; this strengthens the justification for improving the existing legislation through reform in order to make it more comprehensible. One of the main criticisms of the Act is that it is "outmoded" (Jack Straw), and much of the language is arcane and ambiguous. For example, before the case of Wilson v Pringle, it was unclear whether there was a requirement for hostility in the commission of a battery. Terms such as "occasioning" and "maliciously" are outdated and are in need of modernisation in order to make the law more accessible, particularly to laypeople. An additional complexity arises from the fact that the law is contained in a mixture of statute and case law. The Act itself was a consolidating statute that has been described as a "ragbag of offences" due to the lack of logical structure (for example, ABH is defined under section 47, whereas GBH and GBH with intent are defined under sections

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1698
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

police powers

Police Powers Questions Q1. Describe the powers of the police to stop and search on the street. And to conduct further searches at the police station. If you are stopped you'll first be asked where you're going and what you've been doing. The police may then decide to search you but only if they have a good reason, for example, that you fit the profile of a criminal seen in the area, or they think you're acting suspiciously. But it is not reasonable to stop and search on the basis of race, dress, or previous convictions. If subsequently you are searched it will take place on the street. If you are asked to remove more than your coat and gloves, or anything you wear for religious reasons, they must take you somewhere out of public view. The police can also search your vehicle. If you're carrying something illegal, such as a weapon, or the police believe you've committed a crime, you may be arrested. You don't have to give your name, address or date of birth to the police if you're stopped and searched unless you're being arrested. They can arrest anyone who is about to commit and offence, who is in the act of committing an offence, or whom he has reasonable ground of suspecting to be committing an offence. If you have been arrested, because you were caught committing an offence; or there is a warrant for your arrest, you will then be taken to a police station. Here you will

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 867
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay